Enlarge textE-mail this pageContact UsPrinter-friendly pageRSS feeds

Entertainment Law

We regularly represent studios and others in the entertainment business. In every appeal, we prepare briefs showcasing the law and the facts demonstrating why our clients’ actions were proper. Our dedication to filing legally accurate, factually compelling briefs is vital in entertainment cases, where the public perception of a case may be distorted by inaccurate press accounts.

Our work is multi-faceted. We consult in the trial court to preserve issues for appeal, we assist in preparing post-trial motions, and we handle numerous appeals in federal and state courts. Our work in Coppola v. Warner Bros. exemplifies our approach. Our firm drafted post-trial motions for Warner Bros. after Francis Ford Coppola obtained an $80 million judgment against the studio on the theory it illegally interfered with Coppola’s ability to make a new film version of “Pinocchio.” The trial court granted our motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and struck a $60 million punitive damages award. We represented Warner Bros. on appeal and persuaded the Court of Appeal to reverse the remainder of the judgment.

Contact Frederic D. Cohen or Mark A. Kressel for more information about our Entertainment Law practice.

Representative Wins

Representative Briefs

  • Hoang v. Amazon.com, Inc. (2013)

    Ninth Circuit appellant’s opening brief arguing that actress did not receive fair trial in suit against IMDb.com for breaching its privacy agreement by using the actress’s credit card information to research her age and publish it on the internet.

  • Lyle v. Warner Brothers Television Productions (2006)

    California Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that the First Amendment limits liability for sexually explicit comments in the workplace.

  • Warner Bros. v. Golden (2005)

    Ninth Circuit appellee’s brief arguing that Warner Bros. was entitled to terminate contract to provide programming to a cable network and recover unpaid fees.